plasticman Posted July 23, 2008 Share #41 Posted July 23, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) It may take a couple more years for a nice digital viewfinder solution, but it would make any old style viewfinder obsolete. Yeah - why look at the real world when you have TV? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 23, 2008 Posted July 23, 2008 Hi plasticman, Take a look here Is RF in danger?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
vickersdc Posted July 23, 2008 Share #42 Posted July 23, 2008 It's been interesting to read this thread from the beginning - nearer to the end of it, I got the feeling that this had turned in to a thread just about the M8. I know absolutely nothing of the M8 (the only Leica digital I had was the Digilux 1)! At the risk of being shot down in flames it's surely not all about the digital cameras. I had always, always wanted a Leica camera and finally got round to buying one - a Leica II from 1937... 71 years on and it still works perfectly, gets serviced regularly and gets used. That's unlikely to happen with the M8, Digilux # or any other digital. There's a loyal following of film users and I for one think that... - Leica should bring out a digital SLR as that's where the big numbers are; but... - They need to build up the niche market that is film photography. They've always made film cameras that people have wanted to own - desirable items in their own right. Are rangefinders dead? No; they may be going through a dip in interest but then it's up to users / manufacturers to bring back the interest and start marketing the positives about RF photography. David. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photoskeptic Posted July 23, 2008 Share #43 Posted July 23, 2008 Maybe there should be a bumper sticker, "Only real photographers use a rangefinder". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted July 23, 2008 Share #44 Posted July 23, 2008 ...huh maybe the excitement has gone from the M8 forum Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zapp Posted July 23, 2008 Share #45 Posted July 23, 2008 Yeah - why look at the real world when you have TV? Don't forget that right now you voice your opinion over some kind of monitor device. I am not saying that a perfect digital viewfinder is available right now. It is just close to being available and an obvious improvement over any other viewfinder right now. It would be no problem to add frame lines of whatever FOV you like and all the other RF stuff that require wonderful mechanics - at the same time you have the great advantage of being able to enlarge the view of your image, meaning you can work easily with real tele lenses beyond 90/135mm. You can control depth of field and sharpness as well as work without parallax. Close range focus is possible and guess what, you can have all that and image quality is not even touched by such a system. I almost forgot: No lens parts or lens shades will show up in the viewfinder. Only drawbacks right now: It is not available, it only work with digital cameras and it won't feel the same. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted July 23, 2008 Share #46 Posted July 23, 2008 ... It would be no problem to add frame lines of whatever FOV you like... How would you get a 50mm FoV with a 90mm lens for instance? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted July 23, 2008 Share #47 Posted July 23, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) ...you have the great advantage of being able to enlarge the view of your image, meaning you can work easily with real tele lenses beyond 90/135mm. You can control depth of field and sharpness as well as work without parallax. Close range focus is possible and guess what, you can have all that and image quality is not even touched by such a system. I almost forgot: No lens parts or lens shades will show up in the viewfinder... What you're describing here is a reflex camera. A RF viewfinder does not 'see' behind the lens. When you say that you'd prefer an EVF, you mean that you prefer reflex cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zapp Posted July 24, 2008 Share #48 Posted July 24, 2008 What you're describing here is a reflex camera. A RF viewfinder does not 'see' behind the lens. When you say that you'd prefer an EVF, you mean that you prefer reflex cameras. You just don't get it. Stop thinking in closed boxes. There is more than SLR, RF, viewfinders. What we really want is a camera with perfect image quality and a tool to compose the image. The composing tool is called a viewfinder. An electronic viewfinder is neither an RF nor a reflex finder. A live image from the sensor displayed on some kind of screen provides 100% control over focusing accuracy, depth of field, viewfinder coverage. No need for any mechanical parts like reflex mirrors or a separate rangefinder. If you want different crop lines, add an auxiliary wideangle camera - an RF viewfinder serves the same purpose, but requires delicate mechanical parts, limiting its usefulness (field of view for instance) What is the advantage of the EVF. Compared to SLR: No mirror in the path, no slapping, no vibrations, no shutter lag, no need for retrofocus design lenses with huge distortion. Compared to RF: No parallax, 100% corverage even at close range and for all lenses, and all ind of things I mentioned before. The EVF is just like a ground glass for a large format camera, but with live view you can react much faster. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted July 24, 2008 Share #49 Posted July 24, 2008 With respect, may i ask you again to respond my question? How will you get a 50mm FoV with a 90mm lens through an EVF? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter55 Posted July 25, 2008 Share #50 Posted July 25, 2008 Please, to me your badgering him and you are misinterpreting his meaning. He meant you can have frame lines giving the fov for any lens you want. Meaning a 24mm lens would be a 24 fov, a 5cm lens would be 5cm fov etc etc... Personally I do not like Electronic Viewfinders. Or live view. He is describing the already existant digital P&S cameras. For me I like the optical viewfinder and I have no problems with the superimposed frame lines of my Leica M5 and Epson R-D1. I think these cameras are just about perfect for me. All I want is either another Epson R-D1 or a new M8. I also think my older Leitz Wetzlar lenses some in LTM and some in M mount are perfect for me. Sharp, small, light in weight and some of them are collapsable, which allows me to carry 5 lenses in a belt pouch and one on the camera. With a range from 28 through 135mm, these would be Voightlander color-skopar 28mm F3.5, Elmar f=3.5cm 1:3.5, an Summilux 1:1.4 /50 first version, an a nice Summitar f=5cm 1:2 and a Russian Elmar 1:3,5 F=50mm copy, Elmar f=9cm 1:4 collapsable and an Elmar 1:4/135. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted July 25, 2008 Share #51 Posted July 25, 2008 Please, to me your badgering him and you are misinterpreting his meaning.... Why so? I asked a question upon statements according to which: 'No need for frame lines in an RF camera' and 'It would be no problem to add frame lines of whatever FOV you like and all the other RF stuff'. The rangefinders i've been using for 30+ years let me view outside the frame lines, which cannot do my reflex cameras. But i have very little experience of EVs so i asked (and still do) if it is possible to do the same with them or not. I guess not so far because the EVF 'sees' behind the lens but if i'm right here, what's the point of the statements above? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
haris Posted July 25, 2008 Author Share #52 Posted July 25, 2008 Technically in EVF everything can be done. It can be made such way that VF allways show 100% of lens coverage and when you change lens, EVF change to make 100% coverage for that lens. Like on SLR. EVF, as we know, not showing "real" image, it shows projected image on little screen, so designers can make EVF to project whatever they want. And also it can be made that EVF show allways same coverage and to project only framelines for particular lens, like on classic RF. It also can be made to have real optical VF, not EVF, and to have "projector" which will project framelines (and/or other informations to be optional) for particular lens on some sort of transparent film which will be placed on optical VF. Something like we see on cars which project instruments showing (speed, RPM, etc..) on windshield glass of car, so driver don't have to look down on instruments, driver see informations looking only through windshield glass. Lens can be made to have electronic connection with camera to tell camera which framelines to project, or mechanicall (like in current M cameras) that is in camera instrument which will recognize mechanical change when lens is changed and to "tell" projector which frameline to project according to lens used. Fourth option is that user must change framelines with lever (like on Bessa cameras) or button, and projector will project chosed framelines on transparent film on optical VF. I think third option would be best. It would keep "real RF feeling", would avoid time lag of EVF and user would not have to change framelines manually, so it will keep Leica style of using. Technology exists, it is only matter of designers/corporate decision what to chose (if any). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
palec Posted July 25, 2008 Share #53 Posted July 25, 2008 With respect, may i ask you again to respond my question?How will you get a 50mm FoV with a 90mm lens through an EVF? Possible with additional optical input, something like in the new Nikon's patent: Nikon’s New Viewfinder Does Double Duty - Digital Camera Reviews, News and Resources | Photography Bay Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted July 25, 2008 Share #54 Posted July 25, 2008 Technically in EVF everything can be done. It can be made such way that VF allways show 100% of lens coverage and when you change lens, EVF change to make 100% coverage for that lens. Like on SLR. EVF, as we know, not showing "real" image, it shows projected image on little screen, so designers can make EVF to project whatever they want.... So an EVF can not display 50mm frame lines when you use a 90mm lens, right? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
haris Posted July 25, 2008 Author Share #55 Posted July 25, 2008 So an EVF can not display 50mm frame lines when you use a 90mm lens, right? If designer programm camera computer to show 50mm framelines when you use 90mm lens, it can. But, why would you want that? I mean, if you use 90mm lens, you would want 90mm framelines, not 50mm. Is there reason you would need 50mm framelins with 90mm lens? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted July 25, 2008 Share #56 Posted July 25, 2008 ...Is there reason you would need 50mm framelins with 90mm lens? Because i want to view outside the frame lines Haris, don't you want it yourself when you use an RF? Now does not the EVF 'sees' behind the lens? If so, how could it display a wider FoV than the focal length of the lens? Still confused i must say. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted July 25, 2008 Share #57 Posted July 25, 2008 I understand what you are saying LCT, and it's difficult to imagine a EVF providing the same view as an existing M viewfinder. However, electronic _framelines_ with perhaps a variable magnification optical viewfinder is something totally different, and could be very useful. Whether it's possible to make such a beast at all, or at a sensible price, is another matter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted July 25, 2008 Share #58 Posted July 25, 2008 .... However, electronic _framelines_ with perhaps a variable magnification optical viewfinder is something totally different, and could be very useful.... I agree but the viewfinder would remain an optical one, nothing to do with an EVF, right? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
haris Posted July 25, 2008 Author Share #59 Posted July 25, 2008 Because i want to view outside the frame lines Haris, don't you want it yourself when you use an RF? Now does not the EVF 'sees' behind the lens? If so, how could it display a wider FoV than the focal length of the lens? Still confused i must say. I thought of that, but it can be made as for example when you use M6 with 134mm lens. EVF can be made to show scene like for example M6, and to show framelines for 134mm lens. So you would see out or framelines. EVF doesn't have to be TTL. EVF can have its own "lens", so EVF whole scene coverage is independent of lens used, and lens only change EVF image in a way to show framelines according to lens used. You would have something like TLR RF EVF So, designers can chose what angle of coverage they want for EVF. Let say they can make EVF to show scene as 24mm lens is used, and when you put 24mm lens you don't have framelines, VF shows whole scene, when you change 24mm to 50mm lens, you see 24mm scene coverage and inside of scene you see 50mm framelines, like on M6 with 50mm lens. That is why I didn't understand you before, I am sorry. I thought that is not issue. Of course, question is how expencive will be to make such EVF and would that be viable, that is would such camera be affordable to buyers. Technologically almost everything can be done, but other question is if it is reasonable. I read long time ago when some lens maker said: "We can make zoom lens 1 to 1000mm f1 with great optical quality, but it would need truck to carry it and it would cost millions of dollars". I strongly think it is possibile, but it is designer/corporate decision is it viable. Regards Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
haris Posted July 25, 2008 Author Share #60 Posted July 25, 2008 I agree but the viewfinder would remain an optical one, nothing to do with an EVF, right? And I think that would be best option, to have optical viewfinder and to somehow "project" framelines. As I already said in my first post. Why it should be EVF, I think optical VF would be better, and also would use less battery power Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.